BDK081522

FUE still leaves scars as well. Most patients probably cannot get the "bald fade" after having surgery. It's not a quick fix it and forget. It's a life long commitment. You are showing significant miniaturization at a young age so more than likely you will progress. Wait and try medical therapy if it bothers you before getting a hair transplant.

I would probably wait until the 8th month just to be safe. But that's probably more on the conservative side.

Well, you want to give the grafts enough time to mature to allow the surgeon optimal visual conditions to figure out which areas need greater density. This takes anywhere from 12-18 months. However, if you're growing on a relatively normal trajectory I think you'd be okay to have another procedure at 11-12 months post-op.

The work looks clean and grafts look healthy. Most robotic cases don't look as nice as yours does. I do agree that 1800 for the area covered is a bit light so you'll probably need another session to achieve a high density restoration. Enjoy the journey!

Use the find a pre-screened physician feature of this website. In the upper right corner. I haven't heard of the surgeons you mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't doing procedures well but just not recommend by this particular forum.

We're all just trying to gather as much information as we can and I agree with much of what you say. It's 100% true that each case is unique and as such should be treated that way. I've said that many times. The best surgeons in the world take this approach. That being said, there are guidelines to follow for best possible outcomes. When these guidelines are deviated from too far you can get sub-optimal results. Of course there's many ways to skin a cat but through years of trials and tribulations the best surgeons have developed best practices. There is no universal safe zone. This has been established, however, extracting from a concentrated area on one side of the head of a virgin scalp for a larger FUE case is just not best practice. And I disagree with your comment "so basically one side". The extractions have been spread out evenly throughout the posterior and occipital side of the patient's head. Not just one side.

Got it. I went back and watched the video and he did mention that there were extractions from the back and one side. However if you look at where they're taken from they are very spaced out. My guess is since this was such a small 1600 graft procedure Dr Konior didn't need to go all the way to the other side because he was able to leave enough space in between extractions due to the lower count needed. All my own speculation, but you can clearly see he didn't just extract from one concentrated area.

Just because some surgeons "preserve" a section of donor does not mean that it is neither correct or the industry standard. On a virgin FUE donor it is not correct to concentrate extractions to one area to "preserve" donor for the future. The extractions should be uniformly spread through the entire donor zone thereby minimizing trauma to adjacent follicles and spreading out the scaring. As a result, there is visibly less barren areas where the follicles have been taken from thereby allowing the donor to look unscathed from a distance. You used @1978matt as an example however, what you didn't mention was that he had an FUT initially. This changes the whole logistics of the extraction pattern. It is much more difficult to take an FUT strip from a previous FUE extraction zone. It can be done but the yield will be lower as there just aren't as many grafts available for the strip. If Dr. Konior left some of his donor untouched during the FUE I'm sure it had to do with his previous FUT. I just think it's a bit frivolous to tell newbies that it's standard operating procedure to only harvest from one area as opposed to a uniform extraction pattern for a virgin FUE donor.

Where did you surmise that he only extracted from the back and one side? I'm fairly certain Dr Konior extracted uniformly throughout this patient's entire donor area. The most important aspect is that we can't actually tell from looking at his donor. The extractions are imperceptible. Hopefully @MagnificentAlcan clarify. Despite what you may have read here or from other threads on this forum, extraction from only one area thereby leaving other areas untouched for future procedures is not industry standard. In fact, each case is unique and as such, a competent surgeon extracts in a manner to show the least visible signs of graft removal. It's just plan inaccurate to suggest otherwise.

I am going to offer my OPINION based on my individual experiences. I think I am in a rare position in that I have been to both Dr. Diep and Dr. Konior for a subsequent procedure. I wouldn't necessarily call it a repair because I received an acceptable result from Dr. Diep. I was mostly happy with the yield on the hairline but not so with the yield or hair direction on his temple closure angles. He achieves very good density most of the time in the hairline. For me, his grafts seemed chunky and malpositioned. I have coarse wavy hair and yield shouldn't have been a problem. Overall, yield was not a problem. He did put some singles in front of the thicker grafts that softened it but you could still notice hairs in a horizontal line straight across. One of my biggest concerns was that his graft angles were not natural, however. They did not follow the pattern and direction of surrounding hair. They were too perpendicular to the skin. The casual observer would not notice this unless you knew what to look for. So how could it be called a failure? From a macro perspective it was anything but a failure. He delivered great yield in the hairline and allowed me to expose my hairline for the first time in 15 years. Where Dr. Diep failed is in the attention to detail in placement, angles, and donor management. My donor looked destroyed after surgery. His punches were way too large and too concentrated. At the bottom he left a linear pattern that resembled an FUT scar. I have thick coarse donor hair and you should never have been able to tell I had about 3400 grafts at that point if my donor was managed appropriately. Of course the donor didn't end up looking as bad as I thought it would after a year but it shouldn't have been as noticeable as it was. I had to have SMP to camoflouge Diep's donor extraction sites. So, in my eyes that's where he failed me. For any prospective Diep patients, I'm not saying Dr. Diep is going to fail you. Your yield will more than likely be good but just think about the overall procedure and don't take donor management for granted. Before my experience with Dr. Konior I assumed all surgeons operated like Dr Diep. This assumption was inherently WRONG. My experience with Dr. Konior in every way possible was more professional, detail oriented, and patient focused. I believe Diep does what he does out of urgency. Urgency to get the quickest acceptable outcome without spending 12 hours a day on one patient. Dr. Konior is the exact opposite. He literally spent from 0630 until 2130 working on only me. He gives you his undivided attention and is so meticulous with every aspect of surgery. He genuinely wants the best most natural result for every patient that walks through the door. I completely understand that Dr. Konior is expensive and not everyone can afford it. However, he delivers and the end result is worth it in my opinion. To those reading this thread that have not had surgery with Dr Diep, it may seem like many of @jimcraig152 posts are bashing him. I don't see them as surgeon bashing. I think he is offering his insight into his unique experience and allowing prospective patients a glimpse into what they will likely encounter with Dr. Diep. Hindsight is 20/20 and many patients look back and critique every aspect of their surgical experience AFTER that said experience. It's human nature. You extrapolate data based on what you experience. Unfortunately, most of us don't scrutinize the details and tend to focus more on the positive when searching for a surgeon. If we really took the time to understand how the surgeon works prior to scheduling then you could be researching for years. In actuality, if you want to get it right on the first try that is exactly what you should do. After you have selected your surgeon in your mind it is very difficult to see the negatives pertaining to that surgeon. Our minds use a defense mechanism because we want to think we've chosen the best and want to get to surgery as quickly as possible. What I've learned is that the age old saying that all good things come to those who wait is true more often than not. Take the time, do the research, and make a selection based off of reason, not an emotional connection to needing your hair back as soon as possible. Hair restoration is a journey and it has ups, downs, and everything in between. Just be sure to buckle up because the ride lasts a lifetime.

This is a very true statement. Everyone knows a year is the minimum but I think few really believe it. Everyone thinks they'll start growing at 4 months and will have full density by 6-7 months. This MAY happen to certain individuals but it shouldn't be expected as the norm. It can even vary by subsequent transplants on the same patient. I'm actually an example of that. I grew very quickly for my second transplant with Dr. Diep. Honestly, seemed most grafts grew to terminal status by 5-6 months. I'm sure there was more maturing but it wasn't noticeable after that. With my most recent transplant with Dr. Konior I just now reached 8 months and finally have acceptable density with still a great deal of fine hairs that need to mature. I was a bit taken back by how different the growth rates have been but it seems like Konior's grafts come in slower and mature from 7-18 months. @MagnificentAl Just don't get discouraged if you're not growing as fast as some others are. You will have a fantastic result as you've chosen the very best in the industry. My guess for why Konior's is growing differently is because is Konior uses smaller punches. His attention to detail is why his donors look pristine.

@mayhem That's a relatively bold stance you're taking here. If I'm reading your intent correctly you are calling Dr. Konior's ethics into question here. You don't believe it to be ethical to place this hairline on a 28 year old man, referencing it as juvenile. Firstly, let's correctly assess this situation. This would be a solid hairline for any non balding man. It is not juvenile. There is slight recession in the correct areas. You would never notice this man's hairline in the general population and think anything other than it was God-given and he's a lucky SOB to be almost 30 years old with such great hair. It is perfectly placed and expertly grafted to show a slightly thinning gradient in the temporal areas. It's not a wall of dense thick hair smacking you in the face screaming unnatural. Secondly, I can only assume you've never had any direct interaction with Dr.Konior. To call him unethical is just blasphemous. He does his very best to integrate patient desires with his experience in hair loss to give the results that are in everyone's best interest. You are correct in stating that nobody knows how hair loss will progress. We can only guess. However, I think the opinion of a surgeon that has been dealing with hair loss and restoration for around 30 years has generally a better guess than you do. Of course you take into account family history, miniaturization, medical therapy, and you make your educated guess. I would just trust his guess over yours in every way possible.

Most of the time all the grafts grow initially but shed around 2-4 weeks. Don't be deceived by initial growth signifying that the grafts will not shed. More than likely they will by the 1 month mark.

"They should improve their skills" is one of the most laughable statements I've seen on this forum. Dr. Konior, Nadimi, and their staff at CHI are one of the most "skilled" hair transplant clinics in the entire WORLD. They handle each case on an individual basis. They could certainly do more grafts in a single session and have done so, but they do what is in the best interest of the patient now and for the future.

Your donor looks untouched. Just amazing that Dr. Konior can extract from a donor and it looks immaculate less than 3 weeks after. It's a testament that he cares as much if not more about your donor than your recipient. Your recipient seems to be where it is expected at this point. I always had a huge shed from week 3 to 4. Then by 5-6 weeks it was all gone for all my transplants. You look right on track so don't get discouraged by the next couple weeks. My advice would be to grow it all out. The sides along with the top. When it gets long enough on top you can push it forward to help conceal the recipient area.

You're misunderstanding what Dr. Konior told you. I'm sure he said for your case it's $25,000 based on what he expects can be accomplished. He expects to be able to harvest 3,000-3,500 grafts. So for this amount in your case his estimate is 25K. If you only needed 1,500 your price would be less. As Matt stated it's not per graft but total operating cost. When I changed my plan with him and decided on more grafts his price changed for me so it's not a flat $25,000 for every case. His estimates are on a case by case basis.

Yes, but some prospective patients may be able to afford $10 and not $13. So, if they see $13 they rule out the clinic when in fact for their case it may be $10. For this reason, I actually think the range is more informative than an average. Just my opinion and thank you for putting together the list. It is very helpful 👍🏼

You're missing the point. It's not $9.60 USD for every case. I received an extra 76 grafts at no charge. That's why mine would equate to $9.60 per graft. Every case is different and as such his prices vary. Some may be price per graft some overall surgical fee. It's all case dependent so I would update the chart with a range of $10-$16 for Dr Konior's FUE prices. That should cover the range he is currently charging.

@Portugal25 I'm not sure you're completely accurate when saying Konior charges $15.4 USD per graft. He actually doesn't really charge by the graft. It's more of an overall surgical fee based on your individual case. If there are particular circumstances with your surgery that may make if more difficult then maybe your fee may be higher than others. He takes the whole picture into account when offering surgical fee estimates. I had an FUE with him in March 2020 and if you break down my case into a per graft fee it was about $9.60 USD.

It looks like we have a rare non-shedder here lol. You don't see it often but there's a few cases I've seen. The work looks great man. Congratulations. Maybe take a few with the he light source coming from in front of you. This will help show how good the work truly is.

You're missing the point of our advice. Any clinic that suggests this as the number 1 approach should be avoided. Even if they do FUE they aren't portraying the clinical judgment that is needed in your situation. This will no doubt translate into their surgical technique. It's essentially a warning sign that they're either unethical in their approach to surgery or incompetent with today's standard for hair restoration.

Because with the extraction techniques of today there is no benefit to take a strip out for such a small procedure. It would leave a small linear scar that might not allow you to cut the sides short. FUE would spread out the extraction sites thereby allowing shorter hair. All that being said if you're adamant about it go to a top surgeon and get their honest assessment of your situation. My guess is most will advise not to undertake surgical intervention at this point. Don't trust a Hollywood celebrity surgeon that probably only wants your money.

An FUT for 100 grafts? Any clinic that even suggests that is worth running away from. You're a Norwood -1. I understand that you may see flaws but it is not worth going through surgery to fix what you perceive as deficient. Nobody else would notice it. Don't waste the money or risk of a botched surgery with subpar surgeons for such a miniscule change. A couple dashes of toppik and you could never tell.

Those red spots are just bruising around extraction sites. Dr Konior's punches are so well done that they're virtually undectable by day 3. The bruising is completely normal and just signifies that there was some bleeding under the epidermis layer. Nothing to be concerned about and they will be gone in the time it takes a typical bruise to heal.

My swelling started on day 2 and dissipated by day 6/7. I was pretty consistent with icing on my forehead and eyes.